June 24, 2013

Quick Hits inspired by Jim Carrey

Jim Carrey has opted out of promoting his new movie because of the gun violence involved. He is being consistent in his principles - having been an avid anti-gun advocate since Sandy Hook. But the same consistency cannot be seen in his career. His star has dwindled and he is sabotaging his own career by refusing to promote the film. But that aside, he has been paid a salary - would that not including efforts at promotion for the film, as a contractual obligation? I disagree with his stance on the second amendment, but I am not questioning his commitment to his cause. I am questioning his commitment to his obligations.

************************************************

In the same story I was reminded about something that has bothered me for some time. There was a quote from the Executive Producer, about films not being responsible for changing behavior in those who view it;

"Ultimately, this is his decision, but I've never quite bought the notion that violence in fiction leads to violence in real-life any more than Harry Potter casting a spell creates more Boy Wizards in real-life."

That's a common cry from Hollywood - don't blame us for the violence or moral decay in society. We are a mirror of society not an inspiration for it.

Okay, then explain to me why there are so many activist actors trying to influence the public with their politics. And why is that reflected in movies and music and television show advocacy? It's not hypocrisy, it's duplicity.

************************************************

Jim Carrey's post Sandy Hook twitter tweet was also mentioned in the article:

"20 mass shootings a yr in America. Are you ok with that? I'm not. ;^\"

Great Jim. But aren't you still a Canadian citizen as well as an American citizen? Yeah, then you might want to commit to a country before you commit to a political stance anathema to the Constitution of one of those two countries. Just saying.

************************************************

People from other countries unwilling to commit to the new nation ultimately end up being a burden and disruptive to their host nation. Carrey's a burden because he's trying to change the culture to suit his own views. He's okay with making money from a violent movie but he doesn't want people to watch it. WTF?

Given that dichotomy what are we to make of illegal immigrants from Mexico who clearly do not identify as American, aren't willing to conform to its rules (in fact their very presence is a violation of those laws)? What is their motivation? Where is their national allegiance? The answer it seems, is to naturalize these millions of people. Right now. And what will they bring to the nation should they be legalized? With those questions still unanswered or the answers dubious at best, there should be ZERO rush to pass immigration reform that offers amnesty.